A Greedy reassignment algorithm for the PBS minimum monitor unit constraint

Proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatment plans are made of numerous unique spots of different weights. These weights are optimized by the treatment planning systems, and sometimes fall below the deliverable threshold set by the treatment delivery system. The purpose of this work is to investigate a Greedy reassignment algorithm to mitigate the effects of these low weight pencil beams. The algorithm is applied during post-processing to the optimized plan to generate deliverable plans for the treatment delivery system. The Greedy reassignment method developed in this work deletes the smallest weight spot in the entire field and reassigns its weight to its nearest neighbor(s) and repeats until all spots are above the minimum monitor unit (MU) constraint. Its performance was evaluated using plans collected from 190 patients (496 fields) treated at our facility. The Greedy reassignment method was compared against two other post-processing methods. The evaluation criteria was the γ-index pass rate that compares the pre-processed and post-processed dose distributions. A planning metric was developed to predict the impact of post-processing on treatment plans for various treatment planning, machine, and dose tolerance parameters. For fields with a pass rate of 90  ±  1% the planning metric has a standard deviation equal to 18% of the centroid value showing that the planning metric and γ-index pass rate are correlated for the Greedy reassignment algorithm. Using a 3rd order polynomial fit to the data, the Greedy reassignment method has 1.8 times better planning metric at 90% pass rate compared to other post-processing methods. As the planning metric and pass rate are correlated, the planning metric could provide an aid for implementing parameters during treatment planning, or even during facility design, in order to yield acceptable pass rates. More facilities are starting to implement PBS and some have spot sizes (one standard deviation) smaller than 5 mm, hence would require small spot spacing. While this is not the only parameter that affects the optimized plan, the perturbation due to the minimum MU constraint increases with decreasing spot spacing. This work could help to design the minimum MU threshold with the goal to keep the γ-index pass rate above an acceptable value.

[1]  Ashish Tiwari,et al.  A greedy genetic algorithm for the quadratic assignment problem , 2000, Comput. Oper. Res..

[2]  M Goitein,et al.  A pencil beam algorithm for proton dose calculations. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  GPU-based ultrafast IMRT plan optimization , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  Hanne M Kooy,et al.  A case study in proton pencil-beam scanning delivery. , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  David Craft,et al.  A fast optimization algorithm for multicriteria intensity modulated proton therapy planning. , 2010, Medical physics.

[6]  Adam Gibson,et al.  A comparison of the dose distributions from three proton treatment planning systems in the planning of meningioma patients with single‐field uniform dose pencil beam scanning , 2015, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[7]  E Pedroni,et al.  Experimental characterization and physical modelling of the dose distribution of scanned proton pencil beams , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  H. Kooy,et al.  Golden beam data for proton pencil-beam scanning , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  D. Low,et al.  A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. , 1998, Medical physics.

[10]  S. Webb,et al.  Segmentation of IMRT plans for radical lung radiotherapy delivery with the step-and-shoot technique. , 2004, Medical physics.

[11]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Introduction to linear optimization , 1997, Athena scientific optimization and computation series.

[12]  Hanne M Kooy,et al.  PBS machine interlocks using EWMA. , 2016, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  Wenhua Cao,et al.  Incorporating deliverable monitor unit constraints into spot intensity optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy treatment planning , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  Charles S Mayo,et al.  Effects of minimum monitor unit threshold on spot scanning proton plan quality. , 2014, Medical physics.

[15]  D Robertson,et al.  Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality. , 2010, Medical physics.

[16]  T. Bortfeld,et al.  Improved planning time and plan quality through multicriteria optimization for intensity-modulated radiotherapy. , 2012, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  Akihiro Takemura,et al.  The use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in radiation therapy: a phantom study for setting internal target volume of biological target volume , 2015, Radiation oncology.

[18]  M. Alber,et al.  Intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning by use of a barrier-penalty multiplier method , 2007, Optim. Methods Softw..

[19]  J. Mechalakos,et al.  IMRT commissioning: multiple institution planning and dosimetry comparisons, a report from AAPM Task Group 119. , 2009, Medical physics.

[20]  X. Zhu,et al.  Incorporating deliverable monitor unit constraints into spot intensity optimization in IMPT treatment planning , 2014 .

[21]  H. Edwin Romeijn,et al.  A class of greedy algorithms for the generalized assignment problem , 2000, Discret. Appl. Math..

[22]  Johannes A Langendijk,et al.  Multicriteria optimization enables less experienced planners to efficiently produce high quality treatment plans in head and neck cancer radiotherapy , 2015, Radiation oncology.

[23]  Christian Richter,et al.  Deliverable navigation for multicriteria step and shoot IMRT treatment planning , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[24]  Gregory C Sharp,et al.  Numerical solutions of the γ-index in two and three dimensions , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[25]  H. Romeijn,et al.  Interior point algorithms: guaranteed optimality for fluence map optimization in IMRT , 2010, Physics in Medicine and Biology.

[26]  E. Pedroni,et al.  The 200-MeV proton therapy project at the Paul Scherrer Institute: conceptual design and practical realization. , 1995, Medical physics.

[27]  W Schlegel,et al.  An analytical approximation of depth-dose distributions for therapeutic proton beams. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  A. Lomax,et al.  Characterizing a proton beam scanning system for Monte Carlo dose calculation in patients , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.